What was Studied?
This study investigated how certification labels shape urban consumers’ perceptions of food quality in Poland and Belgium, two EU countries with distinct cultural and economic backgrounds. Using both quantitative (structured interviews) and qualitative (focus group) methods, the research explored which food attributes signal high quality to consumers and whether certification labels influence their purchasing decisions. The study also examined the socio-demographic factors that might affect awareness and use of certification labels, and distinguished between intrinsic product features (taste, health benefits, origin) and extrinsic cues (certifications, price, awards) in consumer decision-making.
Who was Studied?
The research focused on 701 urban adult consumers recruited at sustainable food fairs in Warsaw, Brussels, and Ghent, with 330 participants from Poland and 329 from Belgium in the quantitative survey. Additional qualitative data were gathered through focus groups involving 42 participants (29 from Warsaw, 13 from Brussels), selected to represent a range of genders, education levels, incomes, and professions. The sample was deliberately urban and composed of individuals with heightened interest in sustainable or certified food products, reflecting the segment most likely to engage with food quality certification labels.
Most Important Findings
| Critical Points | Details |
|---|---|
| Importance of Food Quality | Over 93% of respondents in both countries considered food quality important in purchasing decisions, but always in context—especially relative to price. |
| Perceived Attributes of High Quality | Sensory characteristics (taste, smell, appearance) and sustainability attributes (health benefits, low additives, traceable origin, minimal processing) were the most valued. Technological (ingredient quality, production method) and marketing (certifications, awards, price) attributes were less important. Polish consumers rated sensory and sustainability factors higher than Belgians. |
| Role of Certification Labels | Awareness of certification labels was moderate: only 44% noticed them when shopping. Knowledge of their meaning was limited, and “label fatigue” was common due to the proliferation of labels. Belgian consumers and women showed higher awareness and more favorable attitudes than Polish consumers and men. Labels had more impact when aligned with personal values (environmental, animal welfare, tradition). |
| Impact on Purchasing | Only 36-40% considered certification labels “important” or “very important.” For most, labels did not directly drive purchases—credibility, clarity, and trust in the certifying authority were crucial. A significant share of consumers were skeptical, viewing labels as marketing tools, especially when too numerous. Willingness to pay more for certified/high-quality food was present but limited by income. |
| Socio-demographic Influence | Older consumers, women, and those with higher education or financial security were more likely to value quality and pay attention to labels. National differences reflected Belgium’s mature market and state-led promotion of certified products. |
| Relevance for Heavy Metal Certification | Certification labels are only effective in shaping consumer trust and purchasing when their message is clear, credible, and directly linked to health/safety concerns—implying that for heavy metal certification, label clarity, consumer education, and third-party trust are essential. |
Key Implications
For a heavy metal certification program, transparent communication, third-party credibility, and consumer education are essential to building trust and effectiveness. Proliferation of unclear labels undermines confidence; thus, a single, well-promoted, and authoritative certification would be most effective in guiding consumer choices and supporting regulatory aims.
Citation
Kaczorowska J, Prandota A, Rejman K, Halicka E, Tul-Krzyszczuk A. Certification Labels in Shaping Perception of Food Quality—Insights from Polish and Belgian Urban Consumers. Sustainability. 2021;13(2):702. doi:10.3390/su13020702